Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 133 posts

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#21

Post by hef19898 »

Kliment wrote: post #10
roenxi wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impressive, aren't they? The industrial muscle keeping people warm and happy. I assume Germany has a modern program of mine rehabilitation, so you're only able to see the parts that are currently part of the active mine. The historic mine footprint of an old mine is probably twice or thrice what is visible; much larger but invisible from satellite because it has been rehabilitated. Eg, the area just north-west of Tag…

That's correct (I live nearby). What you also don't see was what was in the way of the mine before it got there. It was populated space, all the towns got cleared out. Normally when someone blows up thousand-year-old cultural monuments we call it terrorism, but not when it's RWE (the mine operator) doing it. The compensation people get is nowhere near proportional to the damage - they get paid based on a fictional es…

I cannot agree more! The only ones profiting from coal subsidies are RWE and company while evryone else pays for it. It would be much more worthwhile, even for RWE themselves, to just use the coal subsidies and plaster all active and potential strip mines with solar farms. But then we are talking about old German politics and corporate culture, so that won't happen anytime soon.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#22

Post by titzer »

jfk13 wrote: post #2

The scale of the scars on the earth here is pretty staggering: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Hambach+Forest/@50.89999...

Thanks for the link. It's staggering.

This is happening in Eastern Germany, too, near Spremberg. If you turn off labels and zoom out a bit, you can see spot them in several places. Impossible to hide global destruction like this.

It's interesting (and scary) to watch us gobble up the Earth. Have a look at Merauke in Papa New Guinea and the surrounding ~100km. Mostly the jungle getting turned into farms, but there are also huge palm oil plantations that are cropping up in the middle here and there. They are huge too.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#23

Post by VBprogrammer »

imtringued wrote: post #19
VBprogrammer wrote: post #13

For someone who has been to Germany the scale and number of windturbines is amazing. It seems odd that they only account for 14% of their electricity production. By comparison I can't remember seeing any solar power infrastructure and yet that accounts for 7%.

I don't know where you got your numbers from. Wind power generated 20% of electricity in 2018 and 26% in the first half of 2019.

The article. Admittedly there is another 3% for offshore wind turbines but I haven't been that far north.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#24

Post by hannob »

quibbler wrote: post #5
roenxi wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impressive, aren't they? The industrial muscle keeping people warm and happy. I assume Germany has a modern program of mine rehabilitation, so you're only able to see the parts that are currently part of the active mine. The historic mine footprint of an old mine is probably twice or thrice what is visible; much larger but invisible from satellite because it has been rehabilitated. Eg, the area just north-west of Tag…

If it can be rehabilitated, is it really so bad? Some are also coverted to lakes, in the hopes of creating attractive leisure destinations.

Rehabilitation won't reverse the CO2 emissions. So yes, it's really so bad.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#25

Post by oeuviz »

imtringued wrote: post #19
VBprogrammer wrote: post #13

For someone who has been to Germany the scale and number of windturbines is amazing. It seems odd that they only account for 14% of their electricity production. By comparison I can't remember seeing any solar power infrastructure and yet that accounts for 7%.

I don't know where you got your numbers from. Wind power generated 20% of electricity in 2018 and 26% in the first half of 2019.

the linked article cites "Clean Energy Wire" as the source.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#26

Post by titzer »

Kliment wrote: post #10
roenxi wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impressive, aren't they? The industrial muscle keeping people warm and happy. I assume Germany has a modern program of mine rehabilitation, so you're only able to see the parts that are currently part of the active mine. The historic mine footprint of an old mine is probably twice or thrice what is visible; much larger but invisible from satellite because it has been rehabilitated. Eg, the area just north-west of Tag…

That's correct (I live nearby). What you also don't see was what was in the way of the mine before it got there. It was populated space, all the towns got cleared out. Normally when someone blows up thousand-year-old cultural monuments we call it terrorism, but not when it's RWE (the mine operator) doing it. The compensation people get is nowhere near proportional to the damage - they get paid based on a fictional es…

The future is going to be ugly. I am not sure how I feel about capital punishment, but given how bad things could get in a future dystopia, the death penalty for environmental crimes of this magnitude would seem tame.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#27

Post by casefields »

imtringued wrote: post #19
VBprogrammer wrote: post #13

For someone who has been to Germany the scale and number of windturbines is amazing. It seems odd that they only account for 14% of their electricity production. By comparison I can't remember seeing any solar power infrastructure and yet that accounts for 7%.

I don't know where you got your numbers from. Wind power generated 20% of electricity in 2018 and 26% in the first half of 2019.

AG Energiebilanzen says its 17.3% for 2019.

Source: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-c...

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#28

Post by bubblewrap »

Kliment wrote: post #18
lake99 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you know what the German protesters are proposing as an alternative? Germany banned nuclear, brown lignite is bad, extensive mining destroys forests, wind power destroys forests and is bad for birds, Germany is not a good candidate for solar, and so on. So what's next?

Germany is actually an excellent candidate for solar (though not nearly as much as places like Spain). It has an enormous solar installed base that produces a sizeable amount of energy, and had the buildout incentives not been cut a couple years back solar would be the second biggest electrical energy component today. Meanwhile coal is still heavily subsidized, to the tune of 4 billion euros yearly.

Solar apparently hasn't become viable after years of subsidization. And the problem of storing energy is still not solved. There is no solar power at night.

Subsidization of coal would of course be equally wrong.

Re: The coal mine that ate Hambacher forest

#30

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

bubblewrap wrote: post #28
Kliment wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany is actually an excellent candidate for solar (though not nearly as much as places like Spain). It has an enormous solar installed base that produces a sizeable amount of energy, and had the buildout incentives not been cut a couple years back solar would be the second biggest electrical energy component today. Meanwhile coal is still heavily subsidized, to the tune of 4 billion euros yearly.

Solar apparently hasn't become viable after years of subsidization. And the problem of storing energy is still not solved. There is no solar power at night. Subsidization of coal would of course be equally wrong.

> Solar apparently hasn't become viable after years of subsidization

Whether that is true or not: How do you expect it to become viable when coal is subsidized?

> And the problem of storing energy is still not solved.

Source?

Post reply on HN